serial_crusher:This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Sybarite:serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle. I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though. If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

Neondistraction:Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle. I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though. If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

If the locality doesn't have a separate (or inclusive) statute covering intoxicated operation of a bike, then that's a problem. It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

HailRobonia:Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

I think an impaired bicyclist could cause some serious and potentially fatal traffic farkups. Drunk biker swerves, you slam on brakes to not hit him, get rear ended, etc.

I'm aware that's a possibility, which is why I don't have a problem with it being a crime. But when was the last time you heard about a multi-car accident being caused by a cyclist? Usually the biker gets hit by the car and that's about it. I just don't think it should carry the same penalty as driving a car while drunk because you're much more likely to hurt someone else in a car than on a bike.

cefm:If the locality doesn't have a separate (or inclusive) statute covering intoxicated operation of a bike, then that's a problem. It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

No. My town already doesn't allow street parking between 2 and 6 am, so further encouraging poor (and college students) to drive instead of safely biking home....is pants on head retarded

Sybarite:serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck. Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.

cefm:It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.

jshine:Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck. Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.

jshine:cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.

jshine:cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.

I'd be cool with just dropping the bike in a safe place, and give the offender the option to walk twice the distance of his aborted travel plans or wait in the drunk tank to see the judge in the morning. Just to give them concrete feedback as to weigh their travel options in the future..

Neondistraction:I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle. I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though. If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

Yeah, I know someone who got a DUI riding a bike in Indiana. As a cyclist though, I'd say that we advocate for the same rights as drivers: the right to ride in the road, etc. That means that we have the same responsibilities. A bike heading down the street is dangerous and can kill someone or cause a car accident that can kill people. That means you should be sober and concentrating on the road when you operate it.

Earthworm Jim Jones:serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

So if you have a DUI and are prohibited from operating a vehicle you're saying they shouldn't be allowed to ride their bike again?

I hate e-bikes and e-bike riders. Most of the ones in my town are too lazy to use a real bicycle or can't get a driver's license because of previous impaired convictions. We've also has a few of them nailed for taking the pedals off which has gotten the users some pretty hefty fines for no insurance or drivers license.

Saw one idiot try to go off road on his e-bike. Laughed like hell when he hit a ridge in the grass and flipped over.

Wish the province would make licensing them and having insurance mandatory. They ride the same roads as cars make them follow the rules.

jshine:Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck. Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.

A friend of mine had a kid hit his car on a bike and die, and he's been pretty much messed up ever since then even though it was not his fault. There can be consequences for others.

And since I had to post that correction -here's the text of the statute:

RCW 46.61.790Intoxicated bicyclists.(1) A law enforcement officer may offer to transport a bicycle rider who appears to be under the influence of alcohol or any drug and who is walking or moving along or within the right-of-way of a public roadway, unless the bicycle rider is to be taken into protective custody under RCW 70.96A.120. The law enforcement officer offering to transport an intoxicated bicycle rider under this section shall:

(a) Transport the intoxicated bicycle rider to a safe place; or

(b) Release the intoxicated bicycle rider to a competent person.

(2) The law enforcement officer shall not provide the assistance offered if the bicycle rider refuses to accept it. No suit or action may be commenced or prosecuted against the law enforcement officer, law enforcement agency, the state of Washington, or any political subdivision of the state for any act resulting from the refusal of the bicycle rider to accept this assistance.

(3) The law enforcement officer may impound the bicycle operated by an intoxicated bicycle rider if the officer determines that impoundment is necessary to reduce a threat to public safety, and there are no reasonable alternatives to impoundment. The bicyclist will be given a written notice of when and where the impounded bicycle may be reclaimed. The bicycle may be reclaimed by the bicycle rider when the bicycle rider no longer appears to be intoxicated, or by an individual who can establish ownership of the bicycle. The bicycle must be returned without payment of a fee. If the bicycle is not reclaimed within thirty days, it will be subject to sale or disposal consistent with agency procedures.

jshine:Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

Yea, DUI laws are designed to keep the public safe from poorly-driven vehicles, so vehuicles that inherently can't cause a serious hazard to others should be exempted -- i.e., vehicles below a certain weight (like bikes) or horses (since they come with their own brain).

It's not impossible to kill someone on a bike, but it's more of a freak-accident that requires the right geography (hills) and a whole lot of bad luck. Killing someone with a car is trivially-easy in comparison.

dv-ous:Neondistraction: Sybarite: serial_crusher: This is stupid. Bikes are vehicles, with or without an e- in front of them. Don't drive them while you're drunk. These people need to fix their laws if that's legal.

There are plenty of states where DUI laws don't apply to bicyclists including five that specifically exempt bicycles (and in the case of South Dakota, tricycles and horses too). That's not to say you might not still get charged with something like public intoxication in many of those places, but you won't get a DUI. There are only a handful of states that have specific penalties for BUI,.

I know in Indiana you can still get charged with DUI even if you're riding a bicycle. I think it's kinda silly to level the same charge and penalties for it, though. If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

You've never been pedestrian-ing along and been hit by a bike.

But where does it end? Have you ever had someone running smash into you? Clearly running while intoxicated should be illegal. Walking too, while we're at it. Even sitting while intoxicated could be dangerous, by gosh!

I was talking to some relative (a cousin, I think) and they commented that a lot of people seem to ride their lawn mowers around town. "Cheaper than the car, I guess." I replied, "Or they've got too many DUIs and can't drive." "Huh. That would make more sense."

I'm definitely not a fan of drunk drivers but I've seen some cities take it way too far. Like ticketing someone who's sleeping one off in their vehicle because they had the keys in their pocket and were, therefore, in control of a motor vehicle. I had a few friends back in the day who would get wasted, unlock their car, stash their keys in a shrubbery, then curl up in the back seat. Just in case they got hassled by some bored cop making the rounds at 3am. "I couldn't move this car if I wanted to officer. I don't know where my keys are. No, sir, I don't lock my car. That's how I was able to get in and go to sleep." Worst they could get was public intoxication.

HailRobonia:Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

I think an impaired bicyclist could cause some serious and potentially fatal traffic farkups. Drunk biker swerves, you slam on brakes to not hit him, get rear ended, etc.

You could say the exact same thing about an impaired pedestrian, or an impaired person on roller skates, or a dog off the leash. Charging a person on a bike that weighs 20 lbs with the same penalty as if they were driving a 2-ton sedan just because it's a "vehicle" is farking stupid.

I have. The idiot bumped into me when I was crossing the street, and fell over in his clips. I said, "hey, are you OK?" and "Alright, be careful." The end.

This text is now purple:Neondistraction: If you're riding a bike drunk you're much more of a danger to yourself than anyone else, whereas if you're driving a car you pose a serious danger to anyone else out on the road.

Bicycles are a major hazard for pedestrians.

So are cars. About 200 times more hazardous. Your chances of dying because you got hit by a cyclist are minuscule compared to you chances of dying by car. From 2007-2011 in NY state, 766 pedestrians were killed by motor vehicles, and 3 were killed by cyclists (none of whom were drunk, BTW). That's fewer deaths in five years than the number of people struck by lightning in NY in any one of those years.

A pedestrian getting seriously injured or killed by a bike is pretty much a freak occurrence anywhere but in large metropolitan areas, where it is still rare enough that you're more likely to send yourself to the hospital by tripping on a crack in the sidewalk than by being hit by a cyclist.

Vlad_the_Inaner:jshine: cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.

I'd be cool with just dropping the bike in a safe place, and give the offender the option to walk twice the distance of his aborted travel plans or wait in the drunk tank to see the judge in the morning. Just to give them concrete feedback as to weigh their travel options in the future..

So are cars. About 200 times more hazardous. Your chances of dying because you got hit by a cyclist are minuscule compared to you chances of dying by car. From 2007-2011 in NY state, 766 pedestrians were killed by motor vehicles, and 3 were killed by cyclists (none of whom were drunk, BTW).

I'll take my chances with getting hit by a car on the sidewalk. Or with cars at speed going the wrong way on one-way streets.

And since I had to post that correction -here's the text of the statute:

RCW 46.61.790Intoxicated bicyclists.(1) A law enforcement officer may offer to transport a bicycle rider who appears to be under the influence of alcohol or any drug and who is walking or moving along or within the right-of-way of a public roadway, unless the bicycle rider is to be taken into protective custody under RCW 70.96A.120. The law enforcement officer offering to transport an intoxicated bicycle rider under this section shall:

Wow. That's the most reasonable law I have ever seen. I wouldn't believe it if you hadn't linked it.

So are cars. About 200 times more hazardous. Your chances of dying because you got hit by a cyclist are minuscule compared to you chances of dying by car. From 2007-2011 in NY state, 766 pedestrians were killed by motor vehicles, and 3 were killed by cyclists (none of whom were drunk, BTW).

I'll take my chances with getting hit by a car on the sidewalk. Or with cars at speed going the wrong way on one-way streets.

I'm not sure what you mean by "take your chances"... you'll never cross the street?

Here's a question for you:

Last year, 30,580 people died in the US because of drunk drivers operating motor vehicles. Over 4,000 of those killed were pedestrians. If every drunk who drove a motor vehicle last year had ridden a bicycle instead, how many DUI deaths do you think there would have been? More? Fewer? How many?

Neondistraction:jshine: cefm: It should be an offense to operate a bike drunk on public streets (possibly a lower level offense that doesn't put points on a drivers' license and has to occur more than once or involve injury or significant property damage to lead to jail time, but an offense nonetheless).

Given that operating a bicycle doesn't require a drivers' license in the first place, it doesn't make much sense to tie the two together.

That doesn't mean it won't happen, though.

...but hypothetically speaking, if you committed enough bicycle-infractions to accumulate enough "points" on your drivers' license to have it revoked or suspended, you could just keep right on riding your bicycle (and committing infractions), since that license wasn't required for the bike in the first place.